South Korea: Need
To Show More Commitments To Improve Its Human
Rights

A Joint
Commentary by the Korean NGO Coalition for the 2nd Cycle of
the UPR on the Republic of Korea

(31 October
2012, Seoul) On 25 October 2012, the Republic of Korea was
reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), which is
a process to review the overall human rights situation and
records of all 193 UN Member States. Unfortunately, the
Government did not make a positive response to most
recommendations made during the UPR session except
withdrawing reservation on the Article 21(a) of the
Convention on the Rights of the Child and taking concrete
steps to ratify Palermo Protocols. Korean civil society
organizations are deeply concerned that the Government did
not show its full commitments to improve human rights during
the UPR session, and urge the Government to work in
conformity with the objective of the UPR which is to improve
human rights situation in the country.

Sixty-seven States
raised questions about human rights situation in the
Republic of Korea and made recommendations accordingly. The
recommendations cover various issues including enactment of
the Anti-Discrimination Act, guaranteeing freedom of opinion
and expression, preventing sexual violence and domestic
violence, protecting and promoting rights of child and
juvenile, revising a birth registration system, ratifying
two core international human rights treaties (ICRMW, CPED),
optional protocols, and four ILO Core Conventions,
withdrawing reservations, and protecting and promoting
rights of migrant workers. Most of all, abolishing death
penalty, revising/repealing the National Security Act and
providing alternative military service for conscientious
objectors were repeatedly recommended by the international
society including at the 1st cycle of the UPR in 2008.
Rather than sincerely showing its efforts to improve human
rights situation on the ground, the Government has been
consistently repeating same replies to these
recommendations.

France and Poland raised concerns on the
violation of freedom of peaceful assembly and association,
and excessive use of force against peaceful protestors. In
response, the Police Agency said that "the assemblies and
demonstrations are limited only for the purpose of the
national security and maintenance of public orders, and as
for the act of violence during assemblies and
demonstrations, police force is mobilised in compliance with
international human rights standards." On the contrary to
this response, in Gangjeong village, Jeju Island, excessive
uses of police forces against and arbitrary arrests of
peaceful protesters opposing the construction of naval base
are ongoing. On 30 May 2012, the Special Rapportuers on the
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion
and expression, on the rights to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association, and on human rights defenders
sent an allegation letter to the Government asking for
clarification on the continuously reported human rights
violations in Gangjeong village. Yet, the Government has not
sent replies. Having said that, it is clear that the reply
made by the Police Agency does not reflect what happens on
the ground. The Police Agency should answer on what
international human rights standards that it is following
while mobilising police forces, and what violence that
peaceful protesters and Gangjeong villagers have used to
justify its excessive use of force.

The United States of
America recommended "to review the possibility of repealing
laws that criminalise on the basis of sexual orientation
within the military". In response, the Ministry of National
Defence mentioned that "the Article 92(5) of the Military
Criminal Act which stipulates sodomy and sexual molestation
act be punished is intended not for discrimination against
homosexuality but for the public interest that is to
encourage wholesome environment and discipline in the
military society. Therefore, it is inappropriate to repeal
or revise such provision at this point." The Ministry of
National Defence clearly affirmed that homosexuality brings
negative impact to the wholesome environment and public
interest while arguing that the Ministry is doing its best
to protect the rights of LGBTs in the military. It is a
self-contradictory attitude.

The United States of America,
Germany and six other countries recommended introducing
alternative services for conscientious objectors. The
Ministry of National Defence replied that due to special
national security circumstances of the Republic of Korea and
since there is no social consensus, limitations do exist to
introduce alternative military services for conscientious
objectors. In 2007, the Government said that they would
introduce alternative military service for conscientious
objectors, but there have been no further updates on this
matter. Currently, more than 100,000 people are already
serving in public services instead of military service
according to the criteria defined in the Military Service
Act. The criteria includes physical or mental deficiencies,
level or quality of academic achievements, special family
circumstances or being skilled in a special or unusual
profession. However, this form of alternatives to military
service includes four weeks of mandatory basic military
training which makes it difficult for conscientious
objectors to accept. Considering the current situation, it
is hard to say that conscientious objectors who are only
around 600 people per year affect to the national security
threats. The Government must immediately introduce
alternative services for conscientious objectors.

Eight
countries including Japan and the United Kingdom recommended
the Government to guarantee freedom of opinion and
expression. The Korean Communications Commission (KCC)
replied that the Korean Communication Standards Commission
(KCSC) is an independent and non-governmental organisation,
and the corrective orders issued by the KCSC are mailed in
the form of recommendation which does not have any legal
force to service providers. However, statistics show that
almost all online articles that received corrective orders
by the KCSC between 2008~2010 were removed from the website.
This shows that the KCSC's corrective orders exert a
significant degree of authority over intermediaries in
regulating online contents. Mr. Frank La Rue, the UN Special
Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, also made
recommendation in his report that the KCSC should be
transferred to an independent body which is free from any
political, commercial or other unwarranted influences.

The abolition of death penalty has been repeatedly
recommended by the international society to the Government
and was raised again during the 2nd cycle of the UPR Working
Group by 19 countries including Belgium, Slovenia and
Argentina. In response to this, the Ministry of Justice said
that death penalty required a broad consensus at the
national level and various aspects should be considered in a
comprehensive manner, such as criminal justice, social
conditions and public opinion. This is exactly same reply as
what the Government said during the 1st cycle of the UPR. It
is a clear example exposing the unwillingness of the
Government in abolishing death penalty.

Revising or
repealing the National Security Act was also recommended by
several governments. The National Security Act is a typical
unjust law that threats freedom of expression. The
Government again repeated same reply as it gave during the
1st cycle of the UPR that it affirmed the National Security
Act should not be misused or interpreted arbitrarily. The
Government also shared that the average number of people who
are detained under the National Security Act is around 20
per year. However, the Government missed a number of people
who have been charged under the National Security Act. It
has been increasing as 40 in 2008, 70 in 2009 and 151 in
2010. This proves that the Prosecutors Office misuses the
National Security Act and applies it arbitrarily. Most of
all, a number of websites that were closed down under the
reason of violating the National Security Act are increased
four times over the last four years. There is no doubt that
the National Security Act threats freedom of expression on
the Internet.

In addition to abovementioned
recommendations, eight countries including Chile recommended
to adopt a comprehensive Anti-Discrimination Act that covers
all discrimination criteria including sexual orientation.
Four countries including Australia recommended ensuring the
National Human Rights Commission is fully mandated and
resourced. Also, concerns and recommendations were made on
the issues such as domestic violence (5 countries including
Italy), marital rape (Canada, Costa Rica), sexual harassment
in the workplace (Netherlands), single mothers (5 countries
including Norway) and children's rights (12 countries
including Germany). Most of all, 10 countries including
Canada recommended to review birth registration system to
prevent secret adoption and child-trafficking, and to
protect rights of child regardless parents' legal status.

Eleven countries including Indonesia showed its great
concerns on the poor human rights situation of migrants and
migrant workers. The Government was also recommended to
ratify human rights treaties including the Palermo Protocol
on the prevention of trafficking in persons especially women
and children, the Convention on the rights of migrant
workers, the OP-CAT, the Hague Convention on inter-country
adoption, the Third OP on the CRC on communications, and the
UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crimes. Above all,
the ILO Core Convention No. 29, 105(forced labour) and No.
87, 98(right to organise) are not ratified yet while it was
one of the Government's voluntary pledges and commitments in
2006 and 2008.

Korean civil society organisations deeply
deplore by the response of the Government during the UPR
Session, as it did not show its full commitments to improve
human rights situation on the ground. The Government did not
share implementation status of laws and policies, and
presented statistics selectively that gives only partial
information about reality of human rights situation in the
country. Since the Government is going to run for the 2013
UN Human Rights Council election, it must put more efforts
to promote and protect human rights in the country and
improve the human right situation by accepting
recommendations made during the UPR session. Korean civil
society organisations will continue its efforts to urge the
Government to accept recommendations given during the UPR by
following up its implementation, holding meaningful national
consultations and suggesting polices to implement
recommendations.

# # # About AHRC: The
Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental
organisation that monitors human rights in Asia, documents
violations and advocates for justice and institutional
reform to ensure the protection and promotion of these
rights. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in
1984.

With a bit of luck the planet won’t be devastated by nuclear war in the next few days. US President Donald Trump will have begun to fixate on some other way to gratify his self-esteem – maybe by invading Venezuela or starting a war with Iran. More>>

ACLU: Step by step, point by point, the court laid out what has been clear from the start: The president promised to ban Muslims from the United States, and his executive orders are an attempt to do just that. More>>